tv Bloomberg West Bloomberg August 25, 2016 6:00pm-7:01pm EDT
outreach to african-americans, trump has stood up in front of largely white audiences and described black communities in such insulting and ignorant terms. campaign rally in manchester, new hampshire, mr. trump delivered in on apology defense -- an unapologetic defense. mr. trump: people who speak out against radical islam and who warn about refugees are not islamophobes. they're not. italy, rescue crews continue to search for survivors following yesterday's earthquake. there were more aftershocks today. former fifa president sep bla tter is appealing his band from football. wrongdoing in
authorizing a two-year million-dollar payment of former fifa vice president michael plan 2011.i-- p[lantini in from new york, i am mark crumpton. "bloomberg west" is next. emily: i'm emily chang and this is "bloomberg west." uber burning through a significantly more than $1.2 billion in the first half of the year. we will take you through the unprecedented losses. may beriverless car tech racing ahead but who is writing the rules of the road? we will hear from the u.s. secretary of transportation about self driving regulation. and could someone hack your pacemaker? we will take a look at the
vulnerabilities of medical devices and a bold new call from carson block. to o ur lead, and mounting financial losses at uber. conference call with investors, the head of finance explained that uber lost more money and the second quarter even it did in the first, totaling more than $1.2 billion in just the first half of the year. uber turned a profit in the u.s. in q1 but lost $100 million in q2. in the second quarter, investors were told losses exceeded $750 million. $4 billions lost over the course of its lifetime. but with more than $16 billion raised in cash and debt, how worrying are these losses? here to help us break it down, our bloomberg news uber reporter eric newcomer. it is growing fast but it is losing faster. how worried should we be? money inr has a lot of
the bank. they have a billion dollars in cash. they have a credit line of $2 billion and $1.2 billion loans. they have the money. it is a matter of one can they turn around their burn rate? buts something they can do the question is whether it will be as big of a business as it is today if they have to pull back on their losses. emily: where are these losses coming from, china, subsidies? eric: it is definitely subsidies. china mostly. in two years, they have lost $2 billion there, especially in the second quarter, they were getting ready to negotiate with deal.em to cut a they had every incentive to get as much market share to say, we deserve this bigger stake in your company because we are a bigger stake of the market. so, they were going full tilt in china. emily: these are subsidies to drivers. can they remain competitive? eric: when they are competing in
a market with another player, drivers are super price-sensitive. anyone in san francisco, new york or lyf and uber are competing you can see drivers with both apps. so, you have to make sure you're giving drivers the best paid, if you want them to work for your service. emily: didi's going to get uber $1 billion for his china business. how much would these losses or change or decide what uber is no longer in china? eric: just the first quarter of this year, uber was profitable in the united states, now it is losing $100 billion. uber and changes profitability by saying, instead of taking 20% of bookings, we will only take 15% and all of a sudden things skyrocket. without even knowing what their goals are the next quarter, it would be hard to guess exactly what is going to happen. , another new number in your reporting is that the evaluation is $69 billion. 5 billion, which is
eye-popping. explain that number. $62.5 is the pre-money evaluation. then you get all of this money, you added up and then the post - money evaluation for a while, uber was spending at $68 billion. didi invests another $1 billion. we and up at six to $9 billion. emily: my favorite part of your story is where you talk about whether or not there is precedent for this and it's hard to recall a company that lost this much money this fast. you mentioned amazon never lost more than $1.4 billion in 2000. that was a lot 16 years ago. eric: they laid off 15% of the workforce. emily: is there any precedent for a company to lose this much money this fast even if it has this much potential? eric: i e-mailed a bunch of academics. we cannot figure out a lot of think it a lot of people pointed
to amazon. i looked at cosmo the dot come lost together they only $1 billion. even if you look at public chip makers, it is hard to find companies that have invested quite as much as uber. uber's not buying big manufacturing facilities or anything like that. they are spending money on subsidies they go away after they have spent them. it is really unprecedented, but it has the ambition of amazon. we want to build this huge network. emily: they also have their projects, driverless cars. eric newcomer, great reporting. thank you so much. we are going to have much more coming on the future of transportation in our interview with secretary of transportation later this hour. another story we are watching, apple is working on a video sharing app. as company looks to catch up with snapchat and facebook. they develop social media platforms. whenews comes at a time
's business is slowing. i want to bring in mark who broke the story. explain how this would work. mark: apple sees that lots of users are hooked on snapchat, facebook messenger, twitter, instagram, and they want a piece big social, this media network industry. they are creating an application to allow users, and to do this under one minute, to record something, edited with filters and then be able to upload it and send it to any existing social network from within the app. they are entering this as the theact greaters, to push iphone to social network users. emily: is that in competition with facebook and snapchat, or would it be competitive? >> i would not say this would
put apple in direct competition with snapchat and facebook, but it would put apple in competition in terms of eyeballs. actually looking at these programs is really important. how many minutes a day people spend in each of these applications. snapchat's latest numbers indicate that people spend 15 minutes a day in the application. apple can get those eyeballs, even a few minutes from snapchat, they are still going to have many more monetization opportunities. and it really pushes people to buy these products if they like the applications compatible to the iphone. emily: how much revenue could this add to the services business? this could increase engagement, increase interest in the hardware, but what about the services business that tim cook is trying to grow? services business grew 20% year-over-year in the quarter, netting $6 billion in revenue for the past quarter which is a big increase in the services business and then prior years. we will not know how much this
application if it launches will affect the revenues in the services business until we know how they monetize it. the application is an early development within apple. i do not even think they know exactly how they want to make money from this product yet. emily: when might we see this? mark: right now the plans call for release sometime next year in 2017 as a standalone app to download from the app store. but it is to be seen if apple ends up launching it. they have created applications in the past to kill them and development. we will see how this goes. know youst question, i said they are not necessarily in direct competition with facebook and snapchat, but these platforms already have well entrenched ways that users get their video up on these networks. we have seen google try and fail many times to get into social networking. do you think it is too little too late for apple? mark: i think it a little too late for apple because they identical tois
what every player is doing. but the design, this application is focused around being able to record a video, edit, it, ship it anywhere, send it to friends all under one minute. the goal to be able to do this one-handed, making it quick and easy for users. will see if apple is able to reach that goal. emily: looking forward to seeing it. thanks so much. well, gamestop shares are taking a big hit in after-hours trading. the video game retailer posting a sales decline of 10%. the second quarter is typically the slowest of the year for games. that number was steeper than the maximum 70% -- 7% decline. gamestop has been trying to reduce its dependence on physical game sales. coming up , the on orthodox pairing of a team of hackers and short-sellers. we are talking about the complicated ethics of carson block's life-changing short next.
emily: carson block has set his sights on a new target, st. jude medical. the muddy waters research founder warns that tens of thousands of americans are living with ticking time bombs in their chest. pacemakers and a fib relators that could be compromised by hackers. in a nightmare scenario, could be tempered with. medtechnerability -- holding steady to the security flaws in medical devices and found that st. jude's stood out in a bad way. saint jude's stock sunk on the news. erik schatzker sat down with carson block with an interview and asked about the ethics of
publishing information that could be dangerous in the wrong hands. carson: somebody might make the argument, if you kept your mouth shut, everybody would be safer, but with a really? this is a dangerous world. if you believe that, if you believe it is quite possible that state actors are aware of this already. moren, we have to be concerned with nonstate actors, but we believe that the balance of interest is clearly in informing people of the risks and holding the company accountable so that something can be done. i do not believe that sticking sand andd in the pretending a problem does not exist and hoping nothing goes wrong, i do not believe that is the ethical course of action ever. a public formt in as opposed to a private channel? do not have confidence that saint jude would do anything to make patients aware of this. erik: why not just inform the fda? carson: there is precedent for,
there is a research who identified flaws in an insulin pump. heinformed the fda and became frustrated because nothing happened and he went public. i think the fda, it sounds as though they are more concerned about cyber security and more attuned to the risks, but i've never dealt with the fda. we feel it is important that users know and we do not necessarily have confidence in saint jude and maybe even some of the institutions of government that the right thing is going to happen. large company, very political connected. it could bring a lot of pressure to bear on the fda if there was a private backed channel discussion. this is just the real world here. erik: how many people are at risk? the number ofde's
implantable device users, we do not know how many still have devices, but over the past, since 2008, looks like there have been in the u.s. about 1.1 million of these devices implanted. that's including crt's. i want to make clear, people really should read our report because there is important detail in there that we can't get into here. but one of the things that is important caveat is that medtech and pacemakers. because of lack of device they were not able to test so, so the crt remains the reticle. fda is not creating this is a critical issue, why should investors feel any different? that is draft guidance
which they have given industry time to comment on. there will be a version that goes effective that extra guardsmen resemble that. over 90% of medical device been initiated by manufacturers. that is probably because there is the sort of damocles were the fda says, you do not recall this, we will. so, you should look like you're wearing the white hat here. that guidance shows the fda's current thinking on cyber security and is really important for people to understand that in ce there is actually, an example of an implantable cardiac device that is compromised and where the fda says, ok, this would likely rise to the level of, this would be an uncontrolled risk that would mandate some sort of remediation. so, based on that draft guidance, it is clear to us, our interpretation of the draft guidance, that the st. jude implantable devices fall b far
below the standard establishe guidance. we say that there is risk of having to recall their devices, it is based on looking at that which does illustrate the fda's thinking on the matter. erik: these are draft guidelines and they have yet to be finalized. we do not know necessarily what the calendar for that is. in the meantime, what reaction are you hoping for? what needs to happen if your short is going to be successful? is what were hope happens and there is what probably one happens. i have been probably shorting companies for six years. very seldom have they ever said, you know what, some of this criticism is valid. we are expected to be told patient security is number one. these guys are short-sellers, looking to profit on the back of a price decline, etc. erik: don't be full by a wolf in sheep's clothing. on: they could take it
seriously. they could investigate this. and they could without kicking and screaming recall the devices and stop selling them until they fix the problems. erik: what if that does not happen? carson: we are hoping that the fda, which we are expecting to facilitate a dialogue between the fda and medtech, we are hoping the fda says you need to recall these devices. emily: muddy waters founder carson block with erik schatzker there. besides the ethics of possibly tipping off hackers to this vulnerability, there is the ethical question of why. earlier, matt miller and scarlet fu asked the ceo to clarify her firm's business arrangement with muddy waters. >> what we are interested in achieving is mitigations. we also want the consumers -- >> critics are going to say they
are interested in achieving profitability for you maximize profit by going to carson block and publishing this short, rather than going to saint jude first. that carsonieve has a track history of holding large companies accountable. and that is why we are excited to partner with muddy waters. not only do we want saint jude to be held accountable but to respond but we want the patients and the public to be aware. the public has a right to know. about the risks associated with this bit of technology. and we felt very strongly that st. jude medical were likely to act, shut this up and potentially do nothing. matt: medtch is for profit. this is a business model to make money. justine: we are research company. we incur a lot of expenses. this is not lightweight equipment, this is not software only. our lab has a lot of hardware. we are looking to recover our costs. but our motivations here are to hold -- them accountable so
mitigations can be done as quickly as possible. keep in mind, that is not going to be a small undertaking because of these inherent vulnerability throughout the system. and draw attention to the public patients are aware of the risks associated with the technology is coming out of st. jude medical. matt: what do think about the company's response? st. jude says the allegations are untrue. their chief technology officer. he says there are several errors place.urity measures in we conducted security measures and an ongoing basis. we work on merlin at home and on our devices. justine: what i do know is that we found fault abilities across the ecosystem. we developed what we called proof of concept to demonstrate those phone abilities. chaininggether by
these of all abilities together, we put together three different scenarios which we reproduce internally under controlled conditions. we demonstrated to muddy waters and they reproduce them as well. we have definitely verify the existence of these vulnerabilities that are used, are present in saint equipment that is being deployed today. scarlet: you are monetiz ing your research. tell us how you would make money off of passing on this information to muddy waters? do you make money regardless of whether muddy waters goes through with a short and makes money off of it or is it only if the short makes money? matt; are you paid a fee. justine: we are paid on a fee basis and as consultants. our compensation with muddy waters is connected to his investment. emily: medsec's ceo. cyber security experts say the actual risk of hacks against
emily: two stocks we're watching today. vital plungingo with big-time rival in the car website world. amazon unveiled amazon vehicles which will feature images and specifications on thousands of car models. you can research cars on the site but you cannot buy them. similar to other sites, it's designed to complement amazon's other marketplaces. rest ofe has beat the the world in the first public trial of driverless car technology. a group of residents can hail six self driving taxis with
their smartphones. a startup called nutonomy is running the trial and talks of three other asian countries as well as unnamed u.s. and u.k. cities about holding similar self driving taxi trials. coming up, staying with car tech. do not miss our conversation with anthony foxx on how the government is trying to stay ahead of self driving cars and drone regulation next. you can listen on a bloomberg radio app and bl oomberg.com. this is bloomberg. ♪
whether to remove president rousseff from office. >> [speaking portuguese] >> silencio. rousseff isent accused of illegally shifting money between government budgets to mask deficits. she denies any wrongdoing. there has been no claim of responsibility following wednesday's attack on the american university of afghanistan that left 13 people dead and three dozen wounded when two attackers believed to be members of the taliban were killed by police. santos isn president moving quickly to hold a national referendum on a peace deal with parc rebels. he delivered the final text of the deal to congress and declared a cease-fire with the rebels. farc declared a unilateral cease-fire over a year ago when
president santos refused to grant a formal truce until negotiations ended. the second person in palm beach county florida has contracted the zika virus. the woman says he has not traveled outside the country in months. the number of non-travel related cases in florida is 43. i'm mark crumpton. this is bloomberg. it is just after 6:30 in new york, 8:30 friday morning and city. my colleague has a look at the markets. good morning. david: hi there, mark. it is been a quiet mark and we week in markets. the new zealand index has opened flat. the australian and japanese indices up 0.1%. we will be watching the effect in japan today of the bad july cpi figures, inflation of core of the abenomics attempt to kickstart the economy.
not working out so well. a three-year low back in may. and economist are expecting a 0.4% negative figure coming up. we will also be looking at china where agricultural bank of china reported the first half results. they suffered some of the biggest increases in bad loans last year's and will get better figures from some of the banks yesterday. we want to see what comes out of the figures. those of the things we will be looking at today. back to bloomberg west. emily: this is "bloomberg west." cars is for driverless heating up with automakers in
detroit and embracing innovative technologies from silicon valley, including connected cars and smart sensors. one major question still remains. what are the rules? who is at fault of something goes wrong? the transportation secretary announced today that he te intes to publish driverless car guidelines of this summer. we sat down for an exclusive interview. take a listen. >> look, we are at the early stages of a revolution in transportation technology. and piloting these automobiles in real time is going to be part of how we learn how to make them even safer overtime. we're working on guidance through our department that will industry the understand what we are going to expect from a safety standpoint. this is a burgeoning area, and we are going to work hard to make sure everyone is safe. emily: i know you said now that you are going to be putting out these guidelines by the end of the summer. what will those look like? any concrete things you can
share? i have to let: you wait for the guidelines. what we are trying to do is to try to lay out a framework that will make sure the industry understands the department's point of view and what our expectations are of industry. the states have played a significant role in regulating operations of cars. so, we are going to talk about some of that. and we are also going to talk about how our approach may or may not change in some places where we, get makethey should change. emily: why just guidelines rather than explicit rules and regulations? i think there: will be rules and regulations to follow, but we are at the beginning point of a very quick revolution in transportation technology. for us, it is going to be very important to signals industry and all the stakeholders where we are headed so that they can plan accordingly and as the rules come about, there will be more details filled in. emily: u.s. regulators are investigating the tragic death of a tesla driver using
autopilot. do you believe these autopilot features make us safer. how much safer? secretary foxx: i do. i think there are technologies that will do better. right now we have had 33,000 d eaths on our highways last year. we want those numbers to go down. and some of the data tells us that autonomous and connected cars can reduce by as much as 80% of fatalities and accidents that occur. this is a huge opportunity but it has to be done safely and it has to signal we are sending to the industry. emily: l ast month you alluded to premarket steps when it comes to self driving technology. what might those entailed? ? problem weoxx: the are trying to solve is that along with a disruptive technology of autonomous vehicles connected vehicles, there is also the possibility to get a wide range of entrance into the marketplace trying to
build new automobiles. right now we have a self certification system where the industry, automakers, they have standards they are required to apply those standards but they self certify that they are meeting the standards. we do not actually find till after something has gone wrong where they have not met the standards. as we shift to this new era, we need to have a conversation about whether we should be doing something different on the front-end to make sure the vehicles are safe. emily: what are the negatives to self driving cars? see any? secretary foxx: i think there are an awful lot of positives, but one of the things is that there are places that, where we do not know what we don't know. part of what we are trying to do with these guidelines is to account for the fact that they're going to be learnings that come about overtime, but we know certain things. we know that safety has to be thought about at the very beginning of development of this technology. and manufacturers are going to have to have huge amounts of vigilance on that issue in order to prove to us they can meet standards. emily: how worried are you
about car hacking? concern. foxx: it is a it is concern that industry has and should have. i think that automakers themselves individually are doing a lot to ensure the systems are safe. i would like to see the industry doing more together to make sure that across the system we're getting great safety. emily: we're seeing a lot of types between detroit and lyftt, valley, gm and google, fiat chrysler, do you have concerns about the company's coming together around regulation? beretary foxx: i have to careful not to put my thumb on the marketplace, it's an interesting convergence of the ological edge with conventional automakers. i think there are symmetries where on the technology side, buildingn't as used in
cars and putting cars on the road which is accommodated business outside of leading-edge technology. on the conventional side, their ideas out here being harvested and incorporated into vehicles all the time to it is really not that surprising to see that trend occur. but i think you're going to continue to see a wide spectrum of entrance into the automobile market. emily: the federal government has focused on the safety of cars. states have focused on the safety of drivers. how will that change in this new paradigm? is one offoxx: that the questions i hope archives speaks to, which now that you have the possibility of the car and the software working together to operate the vehicle, what shouldstates, their role be in this new world? frankly, i think that we're orying to come up with a way f approvals to occur so that you do not have 50 different variations on how a particular autonomous car is viewed across
the country, that you get equivalence across the country. and that is something we are working towards, but i will let the guidance speak for itself. emily: i know you guys are dealing with his tesla investigation. there will be more accidents as more cars get on the road. is the driver at fault? if their hand was not even supposed to be on the wheel? or is the company at fault? right now there is some data that says that we could get an 80% reduction in fatalities and accidents.i want to point out that 80% is not 100%. we do understand that there will continue to be some level of accidents that occur. hopefully, we can get closer to zero, but we are going to keep working at it. on the core question you asked, we have got a lot of work to do with the industry to be able to assure ourselves that we are getting the performance out of these vehicles we need.
emily: have you been in a self driving car/ which car? acretary foxx: i have been in google car. it takes a little getting used to. i'm a bit of a control free. when you are not in control, it is kind of hard. emily: was that recent? secretary foxx: a couple years ago. emily: i want to talk about drones. there are so many drones already flying across the country. google and amazon are testing commercial applications of drugs. what are the challenges that lay ahead in regulating this industry? nes,etary foxx: with dro there is a huge amount of promise. for for commercial applications of drones. there is so much that can be done with this. i think the commercial uses of it are moving along quite well. our rule that will take effect on monday of next week, august 29, will enable more commercial
uses without having to go through our current exception process. it's really going to open the door to many more uses that commercial users can put to uas's. on the other hand, i think as we have commercial uses, hobbyists, airplanes, like the integration of all those different uses into a single system is going to be the most complicated part of this. and is going to require all users to be vigilant. so, we are working with the hobbyist industry to make sure people know where the no-fly areas are, because we have had incidents around the country where that has been a challenge. we are going to have to continue educating the public. emily: the transportation industry is changing quickly. how do you see drones playing a role? secretary foxx: it is adjusting to think about. will it take trips off the road?
will the delivery systems that are some companies are providing provide us with a third way to move things that wasn't there before, and reduce the number of trips taken on the surface transportation system? it's an open question because, as we are asking that question, our population is continuing to grow. we'll see. i don't know that we know that answer right now. but wha tt i do know is that we are going to see uses of these drones that change our lives. example, that when we are fighting a forest fire, there may be hugely dangerous places where human beings would be endangered by going to stop a forest fire, where a drone can do some of that work for us. some of those applications are pretty exciting to think about. emily: i know you are focused on smart cities. what role do you see for startups and big ten companies in shaping the transportation of the future? this isy foxx: i think
a huge opportunity for the tech community and for cities. our cities are becoming even more dynamic as more population flocks into cities. transportation challenges are becoming more complicated, and the need for greater choices is increasing. and people want to be able to bike and walk and drive and ride a train or a light rail system or subway. the question for the tech community is how well have you thought about the uses of all users? there are so many technologies now that require the use of a smartphone. but when you are a mayor of a city, you have to think about the people who don't have a smart phone. that community is going to learn a lot about how to deepen the penetration of the technologies they are generating and the more they are able to do that, the more they will find a ready audience in the cities. emily: u.s. department of
emily: story we have been falling. aalibaba is considering an ipo in hong kong in the first of next year. intosaid to have run regulatory hurdles. people in on to say that a mainland china ipo has nothing completely ruled out yet. it controls china's biggest online payment service alipay valued at $60 billion or the
u.s. presidential election is just 90 days away, and both hillary clinton and donald trump are looking to social media to book their tickets to the white house. both candidates have stepped up their spending on snapchat in the last month. he person of the advertising spending for both campaigns. president obama's 2012 reelection campaign -- parker r eed joins me in studio. i'm so curious what has been going through your mind as you have been watching his campaigns unfold, knowing that you were the person in the driver seat for the obama campaign. like if youuuld be lld be are doing the same for hillary now. >> i have been paying a lot of attention for what is happening on the hill reside. i do not think i could have done as good a job as they are doing. what they are doing in 2016 is unprecedented. some of the apps, they released a phone banking app. they are really hitting all the
things we would expect from a tech campaign, mobile, social media, all of those things. emily: both the clinton and trump campaigns are upping spending on snapchat. millennials don't vote. is it worth it? >> i think millennials do vote. they voted in 2012. we will have to see. this thing about snapchat, is that the narrative tool a tool to tell stories. one of the things we have seen campaign, there is a lot of stories she is telling about her successes. emily: obviously, saying anlennial sdon't vote was exaggeration. if you are trying to reach them now, would you spend your money on facebook or twitter or snapchat? what is the most important platform? >> the answer to that question is yes. you do not know what is going to work. if you look back to 2008, twitter was unproven. we did not know if it was going
to work. no one knows if it did work. in 2012, it was suddenly this thing we knew about or you have to always keep your eye on what is next. is next not just what but one is been happening in the four years between the last campaign. snapchat, no one can deny they are where stories are told. emily: there is another survey out about tv ads. hillary clinton and -- spent $1 14 million on television ads. trump's campaign has spent $19 million. he is getting a lot of free publicity but is that a smart way to not spend your money? >> would prefer to be on the hillary side in this equation. purely because -- emily: you are saying it is still worth it to spend money on tv. >> there is a lot of middle americans not on snapchat. a lot of those people have tv's. it is a point to reach into those homes.
if you look at some of the cool stuff we did on the tech side in 2012. i have to imagine the clinton campaign is doing a lot to optimize those tv buys. that $140 million might be worth $250 million. the thing that is important as they are actually doing the work to get the votes. i don't think the trump campaign is doing that work. emily: does it matter if he is on cable news all day long? >> maybe. theink it does change calculus but what we are starting to see his cable news is starting to react to the lying he is doing. it might blow up in his face a little bit. emily: if you were the cto of hillary clinton's campaign, what would you be doing right now? would you be doing things differently? >> the first thing ever do i would be to hire the current cto. it is such a different campaign. primaries, they really did a good job. seeing what they have done with a candidate, and amazing candidate.
they are doing fine. emily: trump is a very different kind of candidate, different opponent than anyone has ever faced. how would you do things differently in light of trump? how would you take himo n? should happen happen today in nevada, where you have hillary clinton talking about what trump really stands for. that is exactly what needs to happen. oftentimes in campaigns, technology is not the answer. the answer is making sure the candidate is getting their message out. emily: we have got 90 days. how do you see the campaigns playing things, playing their cards over the next 90 days? >> all campaigns, all elections, they narrow. i think we will see the field narrow a bit. we are going to see the technology is going to matter. all of the good analytics that the hillary clinton campaign is doing and all the people out there knocking on doors, that stuff is going to matter. i'm excited to see that. emily: when you say the field
will narrow, what do you mean? >> right now we have a lot of polling. and i think trump has a 25% chance of winning, not a very big percent but i think that will narrow. people will start thinking, whom i going to vote for? 90 days out, people are still not thinking about the election. they are seeing a lot of ads in battleground states. in california, no one is speaking about this election. they are not thinking about who am i going to vote for? emily: how big a problem do think the e-mails are for? >> i actually do not think that is a problem. everyone has e-mail. everyone has e-mailed that say things we wish were not out there. emily: we do not know what is in them. there are 33 thousands of that we have not seen. >> i stand by that. i do worry that releasing e-mails that should not be released will open up national security things or things taken out of context. because we do not know what was
happening then. emily: the former cto of the obama campaign. thanks for joining us at braintree. great to have you. tomorrow on bloomberg, do not miss our special coverage of the jackson hole economic symposium. speechf janet yellen's at 10:00 a.m., we will bring you interviews from the fed president james bullard and robert kaplan as well as dennis lockard. this is bloomberg. ♪
emily: a story that is trending. president obama has gone were no u.s. president has gone before, into virtual reality. he's narrating a 360 representation of yosemite park. they are producing a free video. the out today to mark centennial anniversary of the park service. a pie in the sky idea literally.
domino's pizza has tested drone delivery in auckland, new zealand, and is on track to be airborne later this year. why new zealand? the country approved commercial drone activity last year but the skies are not going to be filled with flying pizzas. domino's was employed drones that only one location and local regulations require that drones to remain inside a pilot at all times. pizzat defense -- robot guy will come with the human chaperone. that does it for this edition of "bloomberg west." from san francisco, this is bloomberg. ♪
>> from our studios in new york city, this is "charlie rose." charlie: terry macdonald's ear. his career spans more than four decades. he has edited some of this country's most influential magazines, including esquire, rolling stone, sports illustrated, and has worked with many of our greatest literary talent. he chronicles his long life in publishing and in the world of letters in his new memoir. it is called "the accidental life and